Bishop v. Michigan Department of Corrections
GPTKB entity
Statements (59)
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| gptkbp:instanceOf |
legal case
|
| gptkbp:applicationNumber |
00-1001
|
| gptkbp:caseOutcome |
partially favorable to plaintiff
|
| gptkbp:caseTypes |
civil rights case
00-1001 |
| gptkbp:citedBy |
250 F.3d 1001
|
| gptkbp:court |
gptkb:Michigan_Department_of_Corrections
gptkb:United_States_Court_of_Appeals_for_the_Sixth_Circuit Bishop majority opinion dissenting opinion |
| gptkbp:decidedBy |
April 12, 2001
|
| gptkbp:historicalEvent |
appealed from district court
|
| https://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#label |
Bishop v. Michigan Department of Corrections
|
| gptkbp:impact |
prison reform
|
| gptkbp:involved |
gptkb:Michigan_Department_of_Corrections
Bishop |
| gptkbp:judges |
gptkb:Judge_Merritt
gptkb:Judge_Boggs gptkb:Judge_Clay |
| gptkbp:jurisdiction |
gptkb:Michigan
|
| gptkbp:keyPeople |
published opinion
|
| gptkbp:legalStatus |
gptkb:American_Civil_Liberties_Union
influenced future cases prisoner rights Eighth Amendment rights reversed lower court ruling remanded for further proceedings prisoner treatment deliberate indifference 42 U.S.C. § 1983 failure to provide adequate medical care shaped correctional health policies |
| gptkbp:notableFeature |
highlighted the need for policy changes in corrections
addressed issues of inmate safety analyzed the role of state liability analyzed the standard of care required assessed the role of medical staff considered the impact on inmate health outcomes considered the rights of incarcerated individuals discussed the implications for future litigation discussed the responsibilities of the state evaluated the response of prison administration examined conditions of confinement examined systemic failures in the system examined the legal definitions of negligence focused on medical treatment in prisons highlighted systemic issues in corrections highlighted the role of prison officials involved allegations of negligence involved multiple plaintiffs reviewed evidence of inadequate care discussed the importance of legal representation for inmates |
| gptkbp:outcome |
affirmed in part, reversed in part
|
| gptkbp:precedent |
established standards for prison conditions
|
| gptkbp:relatedPatent |
gptkb:Estelle_v._Gamble
gptkb:Farmer_v._Brennan |
| gptkbp:significance |
impact on correctional policy
|
| gptkbp:voiceCast |
oral argument
|